USPTO Patents Application 10725671

United States Patent and Trademark Office

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450

Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov

APPLICATION NO.

FILING DATE

FIRST NAMED INVENTOR

ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.

CONFIRMATION NO.

10/725,671

12/02/2003 .

David S. Melton

31592-1001

5052

5179 7590 06/15/2007

PEACOCK MYERS, P.C.
201 THIRD STREET, N.W.
SUITE 1340

ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87102

EXAMINER

NGUYEN, HOANG M

ART UNIT

3748

PAPER NUMBER

MAIL DATE

DELIVERY MODE

06/15/2007 PAPER

Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.

The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.

PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

It

Office Action Summary

Application No.

10/725,671

Applicant(s)

MELTON ET AL

Examiner

Hoang M. Nguyen

Art Unit

3748

- The MAILING DATE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address -
Period for Reply

A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTH(S) OR THIRTY (30) DAYS,
WHICHEVER IS LONGER, FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION. .

- Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1 . 1 36(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.

- If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.

- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 1 33).
Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).

Status

1 )E3 Responsive to communication(s) filed on 11 May 2007 .
2a)E3 This action is FINAL. 2b)D This action is non-final.

3) Q Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is

closed in accordance with the practice under Ex parte Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.

Disposition of Claims

4) |EI Claim(s) 1.4-8. 13-19.45,46.48.49.51.54 and 56-59 is/are pending in the application.

4a) Of the above claim(s) is/are withdrawn from consideration.

5) D Claim(s) is/are allowed.

6) EI Claim(s) 1. 4-8. 13-19. 45-46^48-49. 51. 54. 56-59 is/are rejected

7) D Claim(s) is/are objected to.

8) D Claim(s) are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.

Application Papers

9) D The specification is objected to by the Examiner.

10)D The drawing(s) filed on is/are: a)D accepted or b)Q objected to by the Examiner.

Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1 .85(a).

Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121(d).
1 !)□ The oath or declaration is objected to by the Examiner. Note the attached Office Action or form PTO-152.

Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119

12)D Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign, priority under 35 U.S.C. § 1 19(a)-(d) or (f).
a)0 All b)D Some * c)D None of:

1 .□ Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.

2. D Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. .

3. Q Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage

application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.

Attachment(s)

1) □ Notice of References Cited (PTO-892) 4) □ Interview Summary (PTO-413)

2) □ Notice of Draftsperson's Patent Drawing Review (PTO-948) Paper No(s)/Mail Date. .

3) □ Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08) 5) □ Notice of Informal Patent Application

Paper No(s)/Mail Date . 6) □ Other: .

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

PTOL-326 (Rev. 08-06)

Office Action Summary

Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20070603

Application/Control Number: 10/725,671 Page 2

Art Unit: 3748

Applicant's amendment dated May 1 1 , 2007, has been fully considered.

Applicant argued it would not have been obvious to combine the references. The
Examiner strongly disagrees. The modified features are simply the basis elements of
power plants including back-up generators, batteries, and fuel storages. These basis
elements are well known in all power plants and it would have been obvious to add
these basis elements in any power plant as taught by the secondary reference.

Applicant argued the applied references do not teach the erectable features of
the wind turbines and communication system. The Examiner disagrees. All wind turbine
and satellite dish are erectable to the sky to receive wind and signals. Therefore, it's
concluded that the wind turbine and the satellite dish in the applied references also are
erectable.

For the reasons set forth above, the rejections have been made FINAL.

The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all
obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:

(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set
forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and
the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the
invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains.
Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.

Application/Control Number: 10/725,671 Page 3

Art Unit: 3748

Claims 1, 9, 13-15, 19, 46; 48-49, 51, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as
being obvious based on US 4261329 (Walsh et al) in view of US 2002/0153178
(Limonius).

Walsh et al discloses an energy system which can be used both on vehicle
platform (126, 143, 145) the energy system uses solar energy by having adjustable
solar cell panels 44, or to generate electricity. Walsh et al does not teach the generator,
a fuel storage container, and batteries. Limonius discloses a portable power plant in a
car having solar panels 16, electric generators 68, 26, 22, 46, for generating back-up
energy, batteries 48, fuel storage tank 50. It would have been obvious to provide
electric generators, batteries, and fuel container in Walsh et al as taught by Limonius for
the purpose of generating and storing back-up energy.

Claims 1, 4-8, 13-19, 45-46, 48-49, 51, 56, 58, are rejected under 35
U.S.C. 103(a) as being obvious based on US 4553037 (Veazey) in view of US 4261329
(Walsh et al) and US 2002/0153178 (Limonius).

Regarding claims 1, 9, 13-15, 19, 46, 48-49, 51, 56, 58, Veazey discloses a
hybrid energy system which can be used both on vehicle platform (figure 6), or on boats
(figures 5, 7-18), the energy system uses both solar energy and wind energy by having
adjustable solar cell panels 25, or adjustable Darrieus windmill 21 to generate electricity
through back-up generator 26 or to store energy in batteries 24. Veazey does not
disclose the system mounted on a distinct platform from a vehicle. Walsh et al
discloses an energy system which can be used both on vehicle platform (126, 143, 145)

Application/Control Number: 10/725,671 Page 4

Art Unit: 3748

the energy system uses solar energy by having adjustable solar cell panels 44, or to
generate electricity. It would have been obvious to mount the system in Veazey on a
separate platform from a vehicle as taught by Walsh et al for the purpose of ease of
assembling/disassembling the platform. Veazey also does not teach the generator, a
fuel storage container, and batteries. Limonius discloses a portable power plant in a car
having solar panels 16, electric generators 68, 26, 22, 46, for generating back-up
energy, batteries 48, fuel storage tank 50. It would have been obvious to provide
electric generators, batteries, and fuel container in Veazey as taught by Limonius for the
purpose of generating and storing back-up energy. Regarding claims 4-6, 16, 46,
Veazey discloses all the claimed subject matter as set forth above in the rejection of
claim 1 , but does not disclose the specific powers, different types of containers, battery

box, connector.. etc However, it would have been obvious at the time the invention

was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to elect different types of devices
as claimed in Veazey for the purpose of achieving appropriate power output.

Claims 17-18, 36, 54, 57, 59, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over U.S. 4553037 (Veazey) in view of Walsh et al and Limonius, and US
2003/0054329 (Springett). Veazey as modified discloses all the claimed subject matter
as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1 , but does not disclose the communication
system having satellite dish. Springett discloses it's well known for a portable power
plant on a vehicle platform to have a satellite dish (column 2). It would have been
obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to

Application/Control Number: 107725,671 Page 5

Art Unit: 3748

provide a satellite dish in Veazey as taught by Springett for the purpose of
communicating with other facilities if needed.

THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time
policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).

A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE
MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within
TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not
mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the
shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any
extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of
the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later
than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.

Application/Control Number: 10/725,671
Art Unit: 3748

Page 6

Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
Examiner should be directed to Examiner Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)
272-4861. The examiner can normally be reached on Tuesday-Friday from 12:30 AM
to 10:00 PM.

If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
supervisor, Thomas E. Denion can be reached on 571-272-4859. The fax phone
number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-

Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for
published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should
you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic
Business Center (EBC) at 866-21 7-91 97 (toll-free). \

273-8300.

HOANG NGUYEN
PRIMARY EXAMINER
ART UNIT 3748

Hoang Minh Nguyen
6/3/2007